User talk:Tnxman307/Archive 23

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Tnxman307. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

→

Thanks

That was amazingly quick! Many thanks, Mathsci (talk) 13:21, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

No problem. Cheers! TN X Man 13:26, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

User talk:75.216.34.28

Just a (hopefully) quick question. Is there a policy/guideline on non-admins declining obviously invalid unblock requests, or is that something that should be left to just admins? – AJL^talk 17:43, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Usually best left to admins. A lot of times, the blocked user will holler about "abuse of process" and demand an actual admin review their inane request. It looks like this one was already handled though. Cheers! TN X Man 17:47, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

I figured as much, just wanted to double check.

– AJL^talk 17:50, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Checkuser

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Paulioetc another editor brought a second account to my attention on my talk page. Any chance you could take a look? Wee Curry Monster talk 19:18, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Replied there. TN X Man 19:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Tnxman307. You have new messages at HelloAnnyong's talk page.
Message added 12:03, 10 May 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Blocked

i really dont know what should i do now? will i be able to edit now like normal...hope i dont face sucn blocks again due to fault of the person who blocks mePaglakahinka (talk) 14:54, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Since you're editing this page, everything should be cleared up. If you have any questions, please let me know. TN X Man 14:55, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Lake-Town-Murderer

User page edits are suspiciously like the other users listed here: Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Wiki Anthe. --| Uncle Milty | talk | 17:02, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

That's what I thought, but didn't see a technical connection. They seem to have stopped editing, so I'll keep an eye on them for now. TN X Man 17:30, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Could you please......

take a look at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Juggalo11‎ for me please, I suspect he is a sockpuppet.maucho eagle _(c) 23:03, 10 May 2011 (UTC)

Commented there. TN X Man 01:42, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Troll

Hey Tnxman307. On the article page of Singapore, we have an ANON IP trolling again. He keeps reverting an edit I deleted (my rationale was per WP:BRD) and is being discussed on the talk page with no clear consensus yet. Strangely, I got a hunch that the IP is related to RaviC (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log). Anyway you could help with this matter? Either in whole or in part? Thanks and best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 13:24, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

I took a look, but I think the best thing to do is to continue to discuss on the talk page. You may want to ask for a third opinion or take a look at the dispute resolution process. If there is more edit warring on the article, let me know, and I'll protect it. TN X Man 13:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Please revert to my version as I'm close to 3RR now, I'll also continue the discussion by inviting the ANON IP to participate. In any case, his tone is very similar to RaviC, which was what led to my suspicsion. Suggest to semi-protect the article page until a consensus is reached. Thanks and best. --Dave ^{♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫®} 14:00, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/153.65.16.10 blocked yesterday as an Open Proxy

Hi Tnxman, yesterday you apparently set a block up for Open proxies Special:Contributions/153.65.16.10. My IP at work is 153.64.136.150. It falls under that open proxy block. At least when I do a Special:MyContributions from work when I'm not logged on, that comes up. That is my work computer. It is not an open proxy. I believe that only my company accesses that IP address, although I'm far from a technical expert in this area. I sent you an email about this yesterday. I can't edit Wikipedia even when I'm logged into my account from the work computer. Bill Huffman (talk) 15:13, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Your block of User talk:128.146.105.223

You blocked this user for vandalism, but from what I see they were actually trying to correct vandalism, not introduce it to the article. I've reverted the article in question back to a pre-vandalised version. Thanks, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

They didn't respond to any of the messages left on their talk page, including this one, where Wikipelli asks them politely to discuss the issue on the article's talk page. If they post an unblock message explaining that they understand, I'd be happy to unblock them. TN X Man 17:18, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Yes, fair enough. Based on this and the IP location, it's quite possible it was the subject of the article herself. I wouldn't blame her for being upset that a vandalized version of her biography here remained in place for a couple of weeks. I left a note letting her know about WP:BLPCOMPLAINT as well. Best, Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 19:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC)

Unknown username troll

Regarding this, does this match, or is that unrelated? --Jayron32 13:43, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Assuming all the info about LC is correct (the IP ranges listed and such), it appears unrelated. TN X Man 13:50, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

All good then. He's just been particularly active lately. I guess the admins here have pissed off two people. Whodathunkit? --Jayron32 22:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Request a rangeblock

Hi, the pondeepankar / konguboy sockmaster is now resorting to vandalism of user and user talk pages.[1]. He says he is going to go on "offensive mode" to target wikipedians. Can you block the 117.206.98.157/20 ip range. It is one of the IP ranges he uses and seems collateral damage will be less.--Sodabottle (talk) 04:04, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Has s/he used more than the one IP or is it just confined to the one IP that was blocked? I'm hesitant to implement a rangeblock until there's more evidence of abuse. Thank you for tracking this person, though. If more problems do occur, please let me know. TN X Man 11:20, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

He is back again.He uses multiple IP ranges - these are dynamic IPs belonging to Indian state ISP BSNL. I have used these connections before - the ips can be changed by switching the modem off and on. The first IP range is 117.206.98.157/20. Proof that this is a dynamic ip is that - he has used 117.206.96.114 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and 117.206.100.197 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). The second dynamic range he uses is 59.92.112.0/19. Today 59.92.106.224 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) vandalised multiple user pages by adding profanities and in the past he has used 59.92.118.121 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). So question about them being static IPs.

He is now popping in every day to vandalise and taunt people reverting and cleaning up after him. Here he is taunting and defacing previously uninvolved editors - [2] and here. He uses two more ip ranges, but these two are the most used ones. --Sodabottle (talk) 07:18, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Another IP from the 117 range used by him today to vandalise user pages 117.206.102.87 (talk · contribs · WHOIS)--Sodabottle (talk) 09:22, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

117.206.96.0/20 blocked for a week. TN X Man 11:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. My talk page got vandalised third time today by him. He used 59.96.28.72 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). This is another of his dynamic ip ranges. --Sodabottle (talk) 14:11, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

Hi The range block expired on 11 may and he is back to disrupting article - 117.206.107.58 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). Can you please extend the range block--Sodabottle (talk) 08:58, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Blocked another week. I don't feel comfortable going much beyond that, as that is an active range. TN X Man 11:24, 13 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!--Sodabottle (talk) 06:15, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

I have filed a new SPI for the new socks of this sockmaster - Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Konguboy. Please take a look at this--Sodabottle (talk) 06:37, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Your input

If you have time to take a look at this ANI thread, I think it would be helpful. Thanks. Tiamut^talk 19:44, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Certainly, but I'm not sure what other input is needed. I concur with MuZemike's CU findings, although I would lean towards a

Likely over his

Possible, but that's taking into account the behavioral evidence along with the technical evidence. TN X Man 19:55, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look. Oddly, that thread is still open and the user, who was blocked for a user name violation has since been unblocked after his alt name was approved. Is there some other procedure that needs to be followed before action can be taken? Tiamut^talk 16:20, 14 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey there. I guess you indefinitely blocked the user on May 11th (I didn't notice it until today, sorry for missing it). His sock though, User:Vassos55 has not yet been blocked. A new ANI thread has been opened here. Can you update people and put the matter to rest? Tiamut^talk 08:22, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It looks like Vassos55 has been abandoned. I'm willing to let the matter rest there as long as it remains abandoned. I checked their technical information and found it to be

Inconclusive. I hope this helps. TN X Man 11:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Save the Jimbo

User:Jimbo Wales and User talk:Jimbo Wales are under constant attacks by some moron with a taste for what used to be called dirty pictures. Every time a block expires, he's back. You or other CheckUsers may already be on the case, but just in case it has slipped between the floor boards: is there any chance of a range block putting him out of our misery? Favonian (talk) 14:55, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I wish. I checked the last few accounts and they are spread out over two very active /16 ranges. It looks like a rangeblock is out for the moment. TN X Man 15:03, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Feared as much, but thanks for checking. Back to RBI-protect. Favonian (talk) 15:05, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

My Page...

WTF!!! lol, dude Ive gotta ask why did you delete my page"River Toomer" It was all truth and nothing was bad about it —Preceding unsigned comment added by Boredsohere (talk • contribs) 17:44, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

It may have been true, but did not indicate why the person was notable enough to warrant an article. I suggest you read our guide to writing your first article. TN X Man 17:47, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

well sir! it is a good person to know on caesery considering the power BeastRanger has hehehe

Post on WP:AN

I absolutely LOL'd when I read your post here. Thanks for the laughter. Please have a cookie. – AJL^talk 03:30, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Me too. Hope you recover soon, you wild checkuser you! Risker (talk) 05:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
- Same here. And so...

		The Barnstar of Good Humor
		For your wild checkuser skills. T. Canens (talk) 06:08, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

- - Thanks, guys. :) TN X Man 11:24, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Asking for Speedy Deletion

Boredsohere (talk) 15:47, 17 May 2011 (UTC) how do you ask for a speedy deletion?

Just place {{db|Your reason for deletion}} on the page and an admin will review the page. TN X Man 16:49, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Question about your userboxes

If I was to randomly set your vandalism counter ahead 1, would you be able to undo the edit? It would technically fall under vandalism, which would mean you indeed have been vandalized one extra time.

I don't plan to do this, but I just wonder what you would do if someone did this. Shrug-shrug (talk) 17:58, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

I guess it would be a self-fulfilling prophecy! TN X Man 18:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Snookituation

Hey. I just noticed that Snookituation wasn't in the confirmed list. Is it unrelated, or am I misreading things? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 21:19, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Nope, my fault. I've added it- thanks for catching it. TN X Man 21:48, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

block evasion question

Hi, If a indef blocked sockmaster is using IPs to evade his block can i file an spi. I haven seen SPIs declined because of the policy not to associate IPs with user accounts. This guy is editing again with multiple IPs. I am 100% sure it is the same guy (editing from same ip range before, and does the same thing). So in such cases can i file a SPI with IPs alone?--Sodabottle (talk) 14:22, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker)You can file a SPI on the IPs, but Checkusers will not confirm it. More than likely, admins will block the IPs on the evidence that the IPs are WP:DUCKs. – AJL^talk 14:35, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply AJL. The sockmaster in question has gone and bought himself a new internet connection (a mobile dialup sort) which uses a wide range of IPs. (i guess a /16 range). I want to revert his edits wholesale, but to justify the reversion, i need some sort of record (like SPI provides for a sock account) that i can point to and say "this ip is sockmaster x, so i am reverting him". The IP is already claiming he is not the sockmaster. Without such evidence can i be bold and revert him?.--Sodabottle (talk) 14:55, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Gio-Goi

Hello,

I just changed the Gio-Goi page and you said me it was too much like a soapbox thing. Could you please tell me exactly where did i go wrong so that I can rearrange it? Besides this, this should be the very official Gio-Goi page, so is there anyway to erase the previous part and make it completely brand new? Thanks for considaration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ERee (talk • contribs) 16:13, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but Wikipedia is not the place to post an advertisement or "official page" for Gio-Goi. You should read our information guides here, here, and here about why Wikipedia is not the place for that. TN X Man 16:17, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Meowy

Just a heads-up, I've asked a question for clarification of your CU result at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Meowy. Thanks a lot, – Fut.Perf. ☼ 08:41, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry I missed your message, I left town right as it came in. Apologies. TN X Man 21:02, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Good Day

SamsungFuqua (talk) 20:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)Hi Tnxman307,

I appreciate your help in cleaning up the Fuqua School of Business page. I noticed that most other top business schools also do not have clear citations around things like alumni, academics, school history, etc. on their wikipedia pages, specifically: Harvard Business School, Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Sloan School of Management, Columbia Business School, Stern School of Business, Booth School of Business, Tuck School of Business, Haas School of Business, Ross School of Business, Kellogg School of Management, Yale School of Management, Darden Graduate School of Business Administration, and the Johnson Graduate School of Management.

Could you also clean up those pages as well? This would allow all schools to function in a fair environment on Wikipedia in which all data is accurate, well sourced, and patrolled/cleaned-up when necessary by administrators. Thanks.

SamsungFuqua (talk) 20:34, 23 April 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

I'll certainly take a look at those pages. I've also reword the honor code section in the Fuqua article to be more neutral. The way it was worded, it looked like Fuqua was trying to put the best possible spin on the situation. Also, looking at your username, you may want to review our conflict of interest guide, as it may have information relevant to you. TN X Man 16:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Thanks Tnxman307. This is helpful. Also, thanks for taking a look at the other schools listed above. I know that they are all making similar types of errors and mistakes in complying with Wikipedia's guidelines for what counts as reliable, well sourced, and non-promotional information and I just want to be sure that all schools are abiding by these same standards. Thanks again. SamsungFuqua (talk) 16:30, 25 April 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

Hi Tnxman307 - Any luck cleaning up the other top business school's wiki pages? They seem to be all making errors and mistakes in complying with Wikipedia's guidelines for what counts as reliable, well sourced, and non-promotional information and I just want to be sure that all schools are abiding by the same standards. Thanks. SamsungFuqua (talk) 14:52, 4 May 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

Hi Tnxman307- Any progress on addressing this issue and cleaning up the wiki pages of the other schools? It has been a month since we first discussed this issue and it looks like you have had time to address issues presented by users that have come after my request, but none of the other school's pages have been cleaned up in the same way as the Fuqua School of Business. To ensure that the Fuqua School of Business isn't being unfairly targeted for clean-ups, can you address this issue? SamsungFuqua (talk) 15:28, 22 May 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

Samsung; 2 things: first, it's very rude to recopy things from archives back onto a talkpage. Second, there's no time limit for fixing things - we're all volunteers around here! (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:55, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

... and let me add, that considering it says that he's on vacation at the very top of this page ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 16:03, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

My apologies, I didn't realize that there was a specific format for following up on outstanding items that have been archived. I was simply trying to make it as easy as possible for Tnxman307 to follow our past communication and meant no disrespect otherwise. Can you point me towards the guidelines for bringing items back from the archive section so that I can follow such guidelines in the future? SamsungFuqua (talk) 17:57, 22 May 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

... also, I honestly didn't realize that he was on vacation and had no intention of interrupting his vacation. That said, in all fairness I have been patient for a full month and none of my outstanding concerns have begun to be addressed (additionally, my two most recent follow-ups have not received any response from Tnxman307). Hopefully, you can at least partially sympathize with my feeling of being overlooked.SamsungFuqua (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

Patience is virtue and there is no deadline.--ukexpat (talk) 18:29, 23 May 2011 (UTC)

I completely agree. I would also challenge you, ukexpat, and others to assume that I "assume good faith" (Wikipedia:Assume good faith). My style and sense of responsiveness is different from your style and the style of others, but should be treated with equal respect. I mean no disrespect with any post and all should be cognizant of this. Although, Wikipedia has a "no deadline policy," I would again point out that I have been very patient (e.g. waiting a month) and that it is not unreasonable to follow-up on an outstanding item after being so patient. SamsungFuqua (talk) 23:50, 23 May 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

I believe that we all are assuming good faith, and we're politely recommending a few key things. Take for example my talkpage says please do not leave {{tb}} templates there ... and yet, guess what I found there this morning? You may not task another editor with completing anything - indeed, we have another great concept: WP:SOFIXIT. Yes, they volunteered to try and help if they had time... well, they have not had time, and may never have time. We have millions of editors. You are being treated respectfully, like an adult, and like an editor who has their own skills ... (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:43, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I would gladly make the edits myself, but doing so would cause unnecessary attacks to my page of interest (given my user name) by other business schools. Unfortunately, in my case, making edits myself is not a possibility. Additionally, when I make edits to my page of interest, several administrators find the time to almost immediately adjust my edits, but don't have the time to alter the mistakes made by other schools with the same degree of scrutiny. To some degree, I can't help but feel frustrated with what appears, at times, to be a double standard. That said, I have looked past this and have assumed that all administrators are acting in good faith and am happy to continue being patient.SamsungFuqua (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

That's one of the pitfalls of editing articles where you have a clear and inescapable conflict of interest. – ukexpat (talk) 17:33, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

I have also looked through your talk page and cannot seem to find where {{tb}} templates are stated to be forbidden. I noticed that other users have posted {{tb}} templates to your talk page. As I have now done, other users have also mentioned to you that they missed where it states that {{tb}} templates are forbidden on your page and this seems to be a recurring item. You might make such instruction more clear on your page so that I, and other users, don't miss such information in the future. As stated before, I mean no disrespect with any of my posts and didn't mean to offend you or challenge your talk page policies by posting a {{tb}} template to your talk page. SamsungFuqua (talk) 16:29, 24 May 2011 (UTC)SamsungFuqua

It's in the edit notice that's visible when you attempt to edit User talk:Bwilkins, see this for example. – ukexpat (talk) 17:36, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) BWilkins: It might be useful to add that talkback notice to the talkpage instead of being an editnotice. If some uses Twinkle to leave you a message, then they'll never see that request. Cheers!

– AJL^talk 16:54, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Email

Hello, I have sent you an email regarding a somewhat complex case of sockpuppetry. Thanks, nableezy - 20:55, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

I'm leaving my current location, but will check my email later tonight. TN X Man 21:01, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Shez 15

So uhh... "Surhan 123" is not a registered account. Who gets the consolation prize now? ... *coughs awkwardly* — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:24, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Ummmm.... cut to commercial! (I'll go fix it) :) TN X Man 13:27, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Heh. The main reason I suspected it was Mukesh is because a bunch of confirmed socks of his had edited Koffee with Karan. We're absolutely sure that Shez and Mukesh are unrelated? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:53, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, they're on different continents. TN X Man 13:54, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Sulmuesi

Hello Tnxman,

So I see you blocked the sock account and the sleepers, but what about the main account? This is a user with a long block log and history of AE sanctions, and the behavioral evidence ties Sulmuesi to Doktor Plumbi pretty strongly, don't you think? Best, Athenean (talk) 18:37, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually, HelloAnnyong did the blocking and tagging. I only identified the accounts that were using the same IP and computer. Sulmuesi hasn't edited in a while, so I have no technical data to which I can make a comparison. As for the behavioral evidence, you may want to ask HelloAnnyong or another clerk to review that part of it. TN X Man 22:06, 28 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Celebration1981

In your result you say BalencedRight is likely...likely connection to who? -- DQ (t) (e) 11:41, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Stubes99- sorry about that. The filer (who is probably Iaaasi (talk · contribs), evading a block) included a link where a sock claimed that Celebration1981 was the original account. TN X Man 12:43, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

TNX: is Celebration1981 also a Stubes99 sock? — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 13:52, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

I think the claim is that Stubes99 is a Celebration1981 sock. I'm not sure how much difference it makes at this point though. TN X Man 13:54, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Supershorts

I was wondering on what evidence this user was blocked, I couldn't find him mentioned in the SPI and in my opinion he didn't exhibit the same behavior as Mikemikev - for example he didn't show any particular interest in race, and he showed some knowledge of anthropology which Mikemikev never had. I realize there may have been things I overlooked, but I didn't suspect him to be Mikemikev at all after interacting with him for a while.·Maunus·ƛ· 12:16, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

The technical data is pretty convincing that Supershorts=QuintupleTwist (talk · contribs)=Comicania (talk · contribs). It looks like this might have been a good-hand account. TN X Man 12:47, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Ah, good.·Maunus·ƛ· 13:12, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Yeah it was me. Happy now? Assholes.

Email

Just sent you one. — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 15:32, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

And another. It's like we talk all the time!!!!1!!1one — HelloAnnyong ^{(say whaaat?!)} 17:38, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

HarveyCarter

Thanks for the protection on Bruce Cabot. This fellow's a thorn in the side for a long time. Is there a better procedure for obtaining protection than the one I followed? I've been working WP for decades, it seems, but I never feel quite sure about how to proceed with that process. Thanks again. Monkeyzpop (talk) 17:00, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

The best way to request page protection is by filing a request at WP:RFPP. You may want to include a link to the SPI archive for supporting evidence. TN X Man 22:25, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Missed

I hit MauchoEagle-public (talk · contribs) too since it was missed. -- DQ (t) (e) 02:53, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for catching that. TN X Man 11:32, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Just wondering, was it missed because it was on a different IP? Might be more socks there. -- DQ (t) (e) 13:23, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, they've never edited (and were created by another account), so the system hasn't captured any IPs for me to check. I've never run across that before. TN X Man 15:41, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Sockpuppet

User:Jpgordon blocked Ledenierhomme sock User talk:KakMassoudMustHang in March[3]. It looks like he's back (Special:Contributions/93.91.196.124) editing via NEWROZ Telecom in Iraqi Kurdistan (Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ledenierhomme/Archive). Jpgordon suggested I contact you as you have more experience dealing with him. Sean.hoyland - talk 14:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

The edit seems indicative of LDH. It seems they've disappeared back into the ether whence they came. If more activity occurs, please let me know. TN X Man 15:37, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

He's IP hopping as usual

Sean.hoyland - talk 15:58, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

31 hour rangeblock placed. TN X Man 16:08, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the rapid response. Sean.hoyland - talk 16:09, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

No problem. TN X Man 16:11, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

He's back Special:Contributions/93.91.196.116. Sean.hoyland - talk 18:04, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

Why do you consider Patch.com a spam link?

I am the former editor of a local Patch.com news site (have since moved on to other work). After starting up the site, I went to the city Wiki page, added a local media category (as on many town web sites) and then listed all local newspapers and news sites including Patch (not blogs but official news sites) in order of their establishment and type, including the online edition of print publications as well. You then edited the entry and allowed links to the other news sites to stand but deleted the patch site and cited your move as spam removal.

Patch is an entirely legitimate, objective and professional news site (not a blog, social media site or ad site masquerading as a news site) with wide readership in the city that provides a daily news source for residents. Links to other paper's online editions were left but the Patch mention was entirely deleted, so obviously this was not about removing inappropriate links. Could you please explain why one site was targeted as spam and not others...and why was the site then blacklisted? From that point on XLinkBot began auto removing any attempt to rectify this error.

Here's the edit record: 18:46, 20 October 2010 Tnxman307 (talk | contribs) (37,333 bytes) (spam removal, link trim) (undo)

Page is Somerville, Massachusetts, section is Local Media.

The bot that now auto removes it is XLinkBot, but I cannot find a way to alert the owner that they have unfairly blacklisted a legitimate news provider as spam when entered in the local media category. Are you able to reach the XLinkBot owner?

I know longer work for the site, but I would still like to rectify this error.

Thanks for your help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoobie617 (talk • contribs) 18:16, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

user:IntelligentUniverse

Hi there; you blocked this user as a sockpuppet six days ago. he is appealing on the unblock page, via an IP as his talkpage is blocked as well. I wonder if he might have a case; would you, when you have a moment, care to review it? --Anthony Bradbury^"talk" 16:45, 5 June 2011 (UTC)

I will look into it. A brief explanation is warranted, I think, about the talk page access. When the checkuser pulls up a list of accounts on an IP, it will allow you to mark off several accounts using a checkbox and block them all at once. While this can be convenient, the default block settings revoke talk page access (and there is no opportunity to change the block settings unless you do it one at a time). I've restored IntelligentUniverse's talk page access and review the data again. TN X Man 01:42, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I think that for once the little brother claim looks plausible: I can't see any similarity between their editing histories, so I would go for unblocking. I will put the unblock request on hold to prevent other admins spending time on investigating the case, not knowing it is already being considered (as I have just doen). JamesBWatson (talk) 13:59, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I now see that while I was checking you posted a comment on the user's talk page, saying "If the reviewing admin checks the two accounts behavior (a perusal of User talk:86.10.119.131 may assist with this) and believes they are different people, I have no problem with an unblock", so I will go ahead with an unblock. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:05, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

I declined the unblock. I don't think IntelligentUniverse is Anglo Pyramidologist; but it's pretty clear that IU is the blocked User:Liveintheforests. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 14:11, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, I give up. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:13, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

One drawer per sockmaster please. I don't share my socks with nobody :-P (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 14:20, 6 June 2011 (UTC)